You’re free to say ‘I disagree because…’ or even to say ‘I don’t think it’s a majority but I don’t have any evidence to back it up,’ but to say I have no credibility but then say you have no evidence is bewildering.
It should not be bewildering. You dont seem to understand the accepted burden of proof here. When someone makes a claim, it is for
them to provide evidence to backup that claim. If a claim is not substantiated by evidence then it is
unproven, and is, until supporting evidence is available, simple speculation. This is not necessarily bad in and of itself, many scientific (and other) claims begin life as speculative musings. Your claim of "the majority of Tesla owners experiencing PB"
might be true. But until evidence to back that up is available, it is speculation.
The problem occurs when someone presents speculations as if they
were claims backed up by evidence, but then fails to provide that evidence. This is bad since it can lead those who are unwary to accept as facts things that are very far from being so. This trick is often used by those who wish to push a personal agenda, since it is a subtle form of an appeal to authority (which, unless used very carefully, is a fallacy, see
Climate Change Denial). Worse, when challenged, a common follow-up trick is to say "Well, if you dont agree with me, than prove I am wrong." When no such proof is forthcoming the final trick is to sit back and say "Told you so, this shows I am right." Both these tricks are totally invalid. The first because it is a fallacious attempt to shift the burden of proof, the second because it is often impossible to prove a negative.
When someone makes a
very bold claim, then fails to back it up with evidence, and then uses fallacious tricks such as the above to try to push that claim, then yes, that person loses credibility. But note that such loss of credibility has no bearing on the validity of the original claim, which remains
unproven and thus speculation. It
might still be true, but without evidence no-one knows either way.
You seem to think that my saying "You have not provided any evidence that the majority of owners experience PB" is the same as my saying "You are wrong, the majority of owners do NOT see PB". This second statement,
had I said it, would indeed have been a claim, and I would indeed have needed to provide some form of supporting evidence.
But at no point did I say that. I simply stated you have not substantiated
your claim. And I am
not required to provide evidence of that, since the burden of proof is with the claimant.
Put simply, I stated that your claim is in fact simple speculation because it is unsubstantiated by supporting evidence. Your response with examples of PB events is
not evidence for your claim. Examples of PB events are support of a claim that "Some drivers experience PB events", which I have never denied. But "some drivers" is not the same as " the majority of drivers", so pointing to individual examples is not evidence for your claim.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/15963757/tesla_model_y_3543.jpg)
